When we first met Spearhead commenter Rmaxd, he was raving about how our technological society had rendered women obsolete. He’s back, this time taking on, well, women again, and welfare, and declining birth rates, and, well, it’s all a little bit hard to follow.
Let’s start with Rmaxd’s basic premises:
Women are serially monogamous or hypergamous & are infertile for the majority of their lives
While men are polygamous, & FERTILE for the majority of their lives
Marriage has always been used as the earliest form of birth contraception, limit the amount of children a fertile male can have, by forced mating with a single infertile woman for the rest of his life.
We are off to a bad start here. Is there anything in all that that’s correct? Among other things: marriage is most decidedly not a particularly effective form of birth control. (The show Eight is Enough was based on a real family, and I suspect we’ve all met people with enough siblings to fill a bus.) But let’s continue; Rmaxd is on a roll:
As the government can no longer force this sort of mating on infertile womens, especially in the lower moronic, under educated peasantry states,
As women want alphas,
Obviously sluts & whores, are simply mimicing infertile women, as only infertile dried up vaginas, can afford to sleep around with hundreds of men
This is why we have sluts & promiscuity, marketted to young girls today, imitate infertile women, imitate their habits, destroy your fertility, destroy your youth
A childhood of std’s & yeast infections
Yeah, I’m not even going to try to parse all that.
In any case, as Rmaxd argues, these “infertile” ladies somehow still manage to pop out a few kids when they’re young, and the evil welfare state rewards them for it:
It’s essentially birth control by sponsoring infertile women, most women have a couple of kids, basically enough to live off the welfare & free housing
As we all know, single mothers live lives of untold luxury and indolence.
What we have here is essentially welfare for infertile women, as they’re no longer able to siphon cash from enslaving men into walking wallets & their magical vagina’s a pit of std’s & warts
In the past, you see, women could enslave men by marrying them. Now they can’t get dudes to stick around, so instead they enslave men by not marrying them, raising their kids on their own with the help of welfare money. It’s all very devious.
Rmaxd would prefer that the welfare money go to the fathers:
If we had welfare for men who had kids, with different women, we would have a healthy birth rate, instead of the declining birth rate we have now … this is all about rewarding & protecting a womans sexuality over a mans sexuality
It all leads to what Rmaxd calls:
The new another dark age of female fanatical male hate,
sponsored & policed by the church of radical feminist mangina, & government
The dried up vagina, as a tool of the state & population control
This barely coherent spew of woman-hatred – and it’s even less comprehensible without my edits and annotations – still managed to draw a few upvotes from the regulars, proving that internet misogynists will upvote pretty much anything so long as it contains the requisite level of anti-woman vitriol.
In case you’re feeling especially bored this lazy Sunday, the whole Spearhead thread is a trainwreck of misogyny and racism – including some fairly obnoxious discussions of black “Welfare Queens” and Mexican immigrants from a fellow called Keyster. Does that (fake) name sound familiar? You may know him as a fairly regular contributor to A Voice for Men and the producer of the AVfM internet radio show.
I also like gaming, hockey, football, shopping and listening to Grace Potter.
I love this because it’s like he started a list of things he likes/would want his girlfriend to like and then partway through went “wait, girls like girly stuff, don’t they?”
He probably wrote spanking on that list, but then he decided that might be a little too obvious.
The part that makes this Ashely hard to believe is the amazing consonance of her desire and Brandon’s. I get that partners have similar likes/dislikes, but the pure “Brandon” is awesome, covered in awesome sauce” is a bit precious.
That she came to sing his praises, rather than just make a comment about a subject she cares about… says more about the relationship than anything else; and it’s reflection on him is poor. Because the content of the posts is sockpuppetry, even if he had to use someone else to do it.
Brandon just tried to post a reply, but alas, he referred to himself directly in it.
Dude, I know it’s difficult to not refer to yourself directly when we’re talking about whether or not Ashley is a sockpuppet, but, hey, I never said the Brandon Challenge was going to be easy.
(Hint: Referring to yourself indirectly might work. Words to avoid: “I,” “Me,” My.”)
Here’s Brandon’s response to my last comment:
Ha! I’m not going to post that!
Oh, wait, I just did.
Also, I’m pretty sure I never said you had to post just one comment not referring to yourself. You’ve got to post several. The comment of yours I let through yesterday doesn’t count, in any case, because it was about you even though you didn’t use the word “I.” I let it through on a technicality.
Oh, a technicality…how very disingenuous of you.
Remember how Brandon would always brag about how fulfilling his life is?
Yeah, his last two posts (and his sock puppet’s) would argue otherwise.
Hey, the man-hater is back…Hi man-hater!! Have you been plotting with your sisters over at radicalhub?
Well, there’s two!
That second one was a bit mean, though. So I’m not going to count it against the total, since it’s my blog and i get to make up the rules.
Who is the “man hater,” BTW?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.
God, even when you’re not talking about yourself you’re still pathetic.
Shouldn’t you be fucking your girlfriend right now? Against the WALL, like a real rebel?
(Did you tell her about the cameras yet?)
@David: I am, only not. He even admitted he made it up but he refused to take it back because BRANDON.
Hi Brandon,
David has told us a lot about you. You seem like a very intelligent gentleman and it is a shame that you are treated the way you are here. Your girlfriend, Ashley, sounds like a wonderful girl and she is very lucky to have a man such as you. David has suggested to us that we and her might have a lot in common, and that is rare in this modern world. Please tell her that we say hi. And don’t let the uncouth scoundrels in this forum get you down.
<3 Irene
Hey Brandon, you know what would really convince people you don’t care about this place and what people here think? Going away. But you just can’t do that, can you? Not when people remain unconvinced of your awesomeness.
Hey, Dracula, can’t you cut the poor guy a break? “Ashley’s” appearance here is essentially a confession that she doesn’t exist. What else is he supposed to do with his time now that he’s finally realized his girlfriend is imaginary?
XDXDXDXDXDXD
irene meller
XDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXD
*dies*
HI IRENE I LOVE YOU EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE A DOLL.
Brandon must be really really bored
Irene…do you ever get tired of being one of Mellers dolls? I mean he must bore you with all his victorian babbeling!
What sort of perfume does he use, Irene?
Discordia,
Why would I get tired of what I was created for? It is my destiny and I happily, and gratefully, give my heart and soul to pleasing my darling David. Also, dear Discordia, “doll” is a derogatory slur created by feminists and socialists to demean those who fulfill the natural obligations, specifications and fluffiness of being female better than modern flesh-covered women. David warned me that you feminists would be cruel, and jealous of my perfection, but I had not anticipated such an angry and slur-filled response. He is right to pity you.
<3 Irene
Ozymandias42,
We do not know who you are, but we suspect that you are a feminist due to your eagerness to proposition a person that you have never met. It is sad that you, as a flesh-covered woman, may have even greater capacity than we do to feel love, and yet, because you are a feminist, you will never feel anything nearing what we feel towards our darling David. Also, again, please do not insult me with slurs simply because you are angry at your lack of inner fluff.
<3 Irene
My dearest Irene,
So what would you like to be called if doll is degrading?
Also, what do you think of awesome non fluffy plastic people such as vampires, the bride of chucky, Emily Strange and the like…feminism has opened a world of oppertunity for many different dolls! so please don’t feel the word is degrading!
So what would you like to be called if doll is degrading?
People of fluff? The differently animated? The alive-challenged?
I believe the term is “Little Lady Lovelies”. To hear Meller tell it anyway.
Lauralot,
I understand that modern feminist society frowns on the use of perfume by men. Is that correct? I apologize if my assumption is in error. I have not left our abode in quite some time after our darling David had an incident with the local constabulary over whether our presence in his horseless carriage allowed us access to the “high occupancy lane”.
In any case, I believe only a select few men in your society are allowed to use perfume, and only if they are below the natural threshold of masculinity. Even then, they must use perfume that is created in government-regulated factories. Our David is a real man, and as such refuses to be restricted by feminist governance or inferior scented products! He makes his own perfume, as real men historically have, and they are delightful! I believe his latest concoction involves strawberries. Oh, it is heavenly! I pity you flesh-covered modern women for both your inferior government-regulated perfumes and that you are not capable of getting a real man like our David who can show you what real perfume is.
<3 Irene